Reverse snobbery?

Deliberate.

The UCU that runs universities are left wing extremist that hate all things remotely traditional UK and want to destroy it hook or by crook.

Rejecting well qualified private school student is just 1 part of that

Reply 21

nulli tertius

21

Original post by mrkl

Deliberate.

The UCU that runs universities are left wing extremist that hate all things remotely traditional UK and want to destroy it hook or by crook.

Rejecting well qualified private school student is just 1 part of that

However unfortunately for your thesis the OP is complaining about alleged bias against better non-selective state schools compared with poorer non-selective state schools.

Reply 22

nulli tertius

21

Original post by DylanJ96

I'm sorry but that's utter rubbish, my school doesn't breed any culture any more than going to a "worse" school does. Professors at the University of Glasgow have even said that they don't like to take people from my school because they find them to be too "sheltered" and spoon-fed their results - I think it's unfair that we're all brushed with this same comb, I certainly wasn't spoon-fed anything.

I am the key point is whether the opinion of these academics is accurate. You are not in a position to know unless you have attended another school that behaved differently. At the moment I am more likely to consider their comments to be an accurate statement of the position than mere bias against your school.

Reply 23

SebCross

14

Original post by DylanJ96

I have attended another school which was a box-standard comprehensive so I am in a position to compare and I can say that people in the school I'm at now have worked so hard for their results, including me. We weren't spoon-fed anything, just had good teachers who wanted us to succeed.

Good point. This was my school experience as well - and I was at a very strong, though non-selective, Oxford private school. It wasn't at all a case of tutors 'spoon-feeding' us anything; instead, the main difference with state schools (from which I had come previously thanks to a scholarship to the fee-paying school) was a cultural one. Just to broaden the discussion a little - at the private school, it was the expectation and the norm that students would be diligent, hard-working and would push themselves to cover material that went way beyond the standard curriculum. This stood in stark contrast to the state school, where I'm afraid many lessons were simply exercises in crowd control by well-meaning but ultimately quite ineffective teachers. If up to half of the class doesn't want to actually learn, and is being disruptive and misbehaving as a result, is it any wonder that parents that can afford it send their kids to fee-paying schools?

I'm glad to hear that your experience of the state sector was, it appears, more positive overall than mine.

Reply 24

SebCross

14

Original post by mrkl

Deliberate.

The UCU that runs universities are left wing extremist that hate all things remotely traditional UK and want to destroy it hook or by crook.

Rejecting well qualified private school student is just 1 part of that

This is a bit of a generalisation. That said, I actually agree with you that rejecting very well-qualified candidates from private schools is foolish on the part of the very best universities.

Reply 25

RayApparently

21

Scotland isn't a country (yet).

Sorry, I couldn't help it.

Reply 26

RayApparently

21

I've seen Oxford application statistics that suggest no socio-economic bias in the application process.

Not to mention the fact that Oxbridge look at Personal statement/extracurriculars/interviews etc. as well as grades.

Reply 27

username878045

17

Original post by SebCross

This is a bit of a generalisation. That said, I actually agree with you that rejecting very well-qualified candidates from private schools is foolish on the part of the very best universities.

Yeh, it would be foolish. Hence why it doesn't happen. :dry:

Reply 28

karmacrunch

21

I know that inverse snobbery exists but I don't think it happens as much as the opposite (snobbery from 'higher classes') occurred before. Unless you've applied to every uni you are not going to know how inverse snobbery works towards you in all scenarios...

I'm not really sure about what I'm supposed to be arguing about? :/

Original post by RayApparently

Scotland isn't a country (yet).

Sorry, I couldn't help it.

Since when has Scotland not been a country? :lolwut:

Posted from TSR Mobile

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 29

DaisyKate

4

I went to a poor comprehensive with a high rate of free school meals etc. The Sixth Form isn't the largest, but nobody there even applied for Medicine, Dentistry or Law (the courses you mentioned), as the majority don't have the grades/have even heard of the courses. Nobody from my school has ever studied Medicine as far as I know. So in terms of competition, I know that there are other poor schools like mine that really aren't a threat to you!

Honestly, I'm glad universities take into account the school you went too. I would have loved to have gone to a top performing comp or a private school, but I couldn't, so instead I had to try and achieve despite lots of people having a bad attitude towards the "clever" people in the school, teachers included - not to mention poor teaching and lack of facilities, like a library for example. My Firm took into account my school and I think it's only fair for universities to consider applicants from bad schools because I do feel that they are harder institutions to achieve in. However, I don't think it's fair for these applicants to be favoured over private school ones at all.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 30

RayApparently

21

Original post by karmacrunch

Since when has Scotland not been a country? :lolwut:

I believe Scotland is a nation and the UK is the country.

Reply 31

karmacrunch

21

Original post by RayApparently

I believe Scotland is a nation and the UK is the country.

But the UK has 4 countries- England, Wales, Scotland & Northern Ireland- unless they're not countries? What differentiates Scotland being a nation to it being a country?

I should probably look this up.

Reply 32

RayApparently

21

Original post by karmacrunch

But the UK has 4 countries- England, Wales, Scotland & Northern Ireland- unless they're not countries? What differentiates Scotland being a nation to it being a country?

I should probably look this up.

I believe the UK is a Union of 4 nations.

Reply 33

suzywithaZY

18

Original post by SebCross

Good point. This was my school experience as well - and I was at a very strong, though non-selective, Oxford private school. It wasn't at all a case of tutors 'spoon-feeding' us anything; instead, the main difference with state schools (from which I had come previously thanks to a scholarship to the fee-paying school) was a cultural one. Just to broaden the discussion a little - at the private school, it was the expectation and the norm that students would be diligent, hard-working and would push themselves to cover material that went way beyond the standard curriculum. This stood in stark contrast to the state school, where I'm afraid many lessons were simply exercises in crowd control by well-meaning but ultimately quite ineffective teachers. If up to half of the class doesn't want to actually learn, and is being disruptive and misbehaving as a result, is it any wonder that parents that can afford it send their kids to fee-paying schools?

I'm glad to hear that your experience of the state sector was, it appears, more positive overall than mine.

What school, out of curiosity? I live in Oxford xD

Reply 34

karmacrunch

21

Original post by RayApparently

I believe the UK is a Union of 4 nations.

Okay then, I'll look up the difference between a country and a nation (for my own benefit).

Edit: Also, you know that if you don't want to talk to me anymore just say. That's all.

(edited 9 years ago)

Reply 35

JuliusDS92

18

Original post by DylanJ96

I don't represent my school culture, if there even is such a thing. I responded perfectly reasonably.

Hey, I was responding to Renove, not you.

Reply 36

solarplexus

15

Thats why applying to university in the US is better.
1. Not much social engineering. You're either talented or you're not.
2. Unlimited university applications provided you pay.
3. There are so many ethnicities that there is likely to be no positive or negative discrimination.
4. No stupid offer system, they all apply with achieved grades (makes sense does it not).

Reply 37

RayApparently

21

Original post by karmacrunch

Okay then, I'll look up the difference between a country and a nation (for my own benefit).

Edit: Also, you know that if you don't want to talk to me anymore just say. That's all.